(no subject)
Nov. 14th, 2008 01:02 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rxelynSo, for the past two days I have been deprived of the internetz, due to repainting of the house meaning unplugged modem meaning no wireless meaning no internet meaning I has time for books. :D
Therefore I conclude:
My inability to complete Neil Gaiman's Anansi's Boys was most likely because of my preoccupation with my computer rather than a real lack of interest in the story because it was actually pretty fascinating. The twists in the story was expected but different from my original thoughts. The characters are highly vivid and quite fun, I especially like Spider. :D It's also a sort of bildungsroman for Charlie in which he evolves from his old shy self to a more self aware person. It's not as colorful or epic as American Gods, but it sort of describes how your life can suddenly be turned completely upside down without you even being aware. However, I didn't really like the way Charlie and Rosie's relationship was depicted, it was a little too... neglected, that Rosie cheats on him and dumps him and Charlie basically just accepts it and moves on. Maybe the whole point is to bring out his passive personality but really, shouldn't there be more action even for a normal human? All and all, I really like the way Gaiman blends myths and legends into his own stories.
Catherine Gilbert Murdock's Princess Ben reminds me of Levine's Ella and all those other gutsy heroines out there. (I vaguely remember Wrede's princess in some dragon series.) There seems to be a whole mesh up of fairy tales inserted in it, but although, the entire story is pretty original. :) Princess Ben is most definitely not your ordinary princess, she can't do much, is too greedy and maybe a tad too childish, but she's highly individualistic and brave. Queen Sophia may seem to be overly harsh and mean at first, but in the end, you see that her heart is in the right place. The other characters are also not set in black and white, instead everything is subjective in the book. However, I'm a little... irritated with the way she wrote off the misunderstanding that Ben makes at her father's death site. >.> The mistake she made was just plain dumb. I believe that Murdock could have come up with a better plot than just that...
Therefore I conclude:
My inability to complete Neil Gaiman's Anansi's Boys was most likely because of my preoccupation with my computer rather than a real lack of interest in the story because it was actually pretty fascinating. The twists in the story was expected but different from my original thoughts. The characters are highly vivid and quite fun, I especially like Spider. :D It's also a sort of bildungsroman for Charlie in which he evolves from his old shy self to a more self aware person. It's not as colorful or epic as American Gods, but it sort of describes how your life can suddenly be turned completely upside down without you even being aware. However, I didn't really like the way Charlie and Rosie's relationship was depicted, it was a little too... neglected, that Rosie cheats on him and dumps him and Charlie basically just accepts it and moves on. Maybe the whole point is to bring out his passive personality but really, shouldn't there be more action even for a normal human? All and all, I really like the way Gaiman blends myths and legends into his own stories.
Catherine Gilbert Murdock's Princess Ben reminds me of Levine's Ella and all those other gutsy heroines out there. (I vaguely remember Wrede's princess in some dragon series.) There seems to be a whole mesh up of fairy tales inserted in it, but although, the entire story is pretty original. :) Princess Ben is most definitely not your ordinary princess, she can't do much, is too greedy and maybe a tad too childish, but she's highly individualistic and brave. Queen Sophia may seem to be overly harsh and mean at first, but in the end, you see that her heart is in the right place. The other characters are also not set in black and white, instead everything is subjective in the book. However, I'm a little... irritated with the way she wrote off the misunderstanding that Ben makes at her father's death site. >.> The mistake she made was just plain dumb. I believe that Murdock could have come up with a better plot than just that...
